BoxRec

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote: I'm not joking. A tremendous anateur record doesn't necessarily mean anything. Go and watch Cotto vs Muhammad Abdullaev. He was a tremendous amateur boxer- Olympic gold medallist, world amateur championships gold medallist and a 3 time asian games gold medallist and one time silver medsllist and something like 300 amateur victories. Tremendous amateur career better than Golovkin in fact - however he still wasn't a particularly 'slick' boxer! He beat Cotto in the amateurs and got the crap beaten out of him in the return in the pro's.

Rakhim Chakhiev is another example of a tremendous amateur career and boxer but another guy that isn't 'slick'.

Golovkin did look good boxing against Lemieux but the latter fought the wrong fight. He tried to stand off and box at range which isn't his game. Golovkin out boxing someone who isn't a particularly good 'boxer' isn't that impressive to me.

To cut to the chase, GGG is no Abdullaev and Saunders is most definitely no Cotto. A 345-5 record that includes a world championship and an Olympic silver medal is a damn good form line regarding his capabilities as a boxer and since he's turned pro he's only reinforced that impression. Lemieux fought the 'wrong fight' precisely because GGG was dictating where the fight went, which goes back to the first point I made about opponents having a plan but it swiftly being abandoned because of that lethal combination of power and boxing ability. To claim Saunders is a better boxer is laughable IMO - as others have stated, you're confusing flashiness with effective boxing.

Both things that Abdullaev had. Well actually both of his medals were gold. Regarding Lemieux, he adopted that strategy from the opening bell, it's not like he tried fighting his usual very aggressive style/ come forward style where he's throwing heavy leather from the opening bell but was getting thoroughly out boxed by Golovkin and resorted to trying to box at range. He was intimidated before the fight even started because of Golovkins power which in turn made him extremely hesitant to engage.

You cant tell me that in the art of hitting and not being hit that Golovkin gets tagged less that Saunders? Cmon. I remember the spike O'sullivan fight, he barely landed a glove on Saunders throughout 12 rounds. Now I'm willing to bet if Golovkin and O'Sullivan fought, the fight would be a lot shorter obviously and Spike would get badly busted up but I bet he would still land some significant punches before subsequently falling.

Golovkin gets tagged a lot. Against Munroe who's no great shakes he was getting hit a lot and that's happened in other fights aswell. I even remember the Stevens fight where he boxed a lot more intelligently, he was still getting tagged with some big counter left hooks and other shots. His great chin plays a big part.

You're missing my point fella. I'm saying that the Abdullevs of this world are the exception to the rule and as a general formline it's indicative of boxing prowess - for every Abdullev there are far, far more Lomechenkos and Rigondeuxs.
As for the O'Sullivan example, if GGG elected to box rather than trade, do you honestly think the result would be any different to the Saunders result? GGG trades as a conscious choice, not because his defence isn't good enough, as evidenced by the tactical adjustments he made for Lemieux.

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote: To cut to the chase, GGG is no Abdullaev and Saunders is most definitely no Cotto. A 345-5 record that includes a world championship and an Olympic silver medal is a damn good form line regarding his capabilities as a boxer and since he's turned pro he's only reinforced that impression. Lemieux fought the 'wrong fight' precisely because GGG was dictating where the fight went, which goes back to the first point I made about opponents having a plan but it swiftly being abandoned because of that lethal combination of power and boxing ability. To claim Saunders is a better boxer is laughable IMO - as others have stated, you're confusing flashiness with effective boxing.

Both things that Abdullaev had. Well actually both of his medals were gold. Regarding Lemieux, he adopted that strategy from the opening bell, it's not like he tried fighting his usual very aggressive style/ come forward style where he's throwing heavy leather from the opening bell but was getting thoroughly out boxed by Golovkin and resorted to trying to box at range. He was intimidated before the fight even started because of Golovkins power which in turn made him extremely hesitant to engage.

You cant tell me that in the art of hitting and not being hit that Golovkin gets tagged less that Saunders? Cmon. I remember the spike O'sullivan fight, he barely landed a glove on Saunders throughout 12 rounds. Now I'm willing to bet if Golovkin and O'Sullivan fought, the fight would be a lot shorter obviously and Spike would get badly busted up but I bet he would still land some significant punches before subsequently falling.

Golovkin gets tagged a lot. Against Munroe who's no great shakes he was getting hit a lot and that's happened in other fights aswell. I even remember the Stevens fight where he boxed a lot more intelligently, he was still getting tagged with some big counter left hooks and other shots. His great chin plays a big part.

You're missing my point fella. I'm saying that the Abdullevs of this world are the exception to the rule and as a general formline it's indicative of boxing prowess - for every Abdullev there are far, far more Lomechenkos and Rigondeuxs.
As for the O'Sullivan example, if GGG elected to box rather than trade, do you honestly think the result would be any different to the Saunders result? GGG trades as a conscious choice, not because his defence isn't good enough, as evidenced by the tactical adjustments he made for Lemieux.

Fair enough mate but you're missing my point. There's lots of amateurs who have super successful amateur careers ie Olympic golds, World championship golds, etc, etc, who aren't super slick boxers. They're just very good come forward fighters or they have a high punch output and in some cases even the nation they come from plays favourably into it.

I mean Alexander povetkin another example- extremely good amateur career- two European amateur championships golds, World championships gold, Olympic gold and so on. Would you say he's a great boxer at range? Would you say Anthony Joshua is super slick?

Golovkin would destroy Eubank. Would enjoy watching it though.

2 things are essential if you want to hang in with Golovkin ,self belief that you can win and a decent beard,and Eubank Jr has both so its definitly a glimmer of hope

(By decent beard,i mean the ability to take a punch,not that little Amish thing that Jr wears on his chin,thats anything but decent)

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Complete rubbish.

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Yep, I'd also take Curtis Stevens over Saunders.

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote: Both things that Abdullaev had. Well actually both of his medals were gold. Regarding Lemieux, he adopted that strategy from the opening bell, it's not like he tried fighting his usual very aggressive style/ come forward style where he's throwing heavy leather from the opening bell but was getting thoroughly out boxed by Golovkin and resorted to trying to box at range. He was intimidated before the fight even started because of Golovkins power which in turn made him extremely hesitant to engage.

You cant tell me that in the art of hitting and not being hit that Golovkin gets tagged less that Saunders? Cmon. I remember the spike O'sullivan fight, he barely landed a glove on Saunders throughout 12 rounds. Now I'm willing to bet if Golovkin and O'Sullivan fought, the fight would be a lot shorter obviously and Spike would get badly busted up but I bet he would still land some significant punches before subsequently falling.

Golovkin gets tagged a lot. Against Munroe who's no great shakes he was getting hit a lot and that's happened in other fights aswell. I even remember the Stevens fight where he boxed a lot more intelligently, he was still getting tagged with some big counter left hooks and other shots. His great chin plays a big part.

You're missing my point fella. I'm saying that the Abdullevs of this world are the exception to the rule and as a general formline it's indicative of boxing prowess - for every Abdullev there are far, far more Lomechenkos and Rigondeuxs.
As for the O'Sullivan example, if GGG elected to box rather than trade, do you honestly think the result would be any different to the Saunders result? GGG trades as a conscious choice, not because his defence isn't good enough, as evidenced by the tactical adjustments he made for Lemieux.

Fair enough mate but you're missing my point. There's lots of amateurs who have super successful amateur careers ie Olympic golds, World championship golds, etc, etc, who aren't super slick boxers. They're just very good come forward fighters or they have a high punch output and in some cases even the nation they come from plays favourably into it.

I mean Alexander povetkin another example- extremely good amateur career- two European amateur championships golds, World championships gold, Olympic gold and so on. Would you say he's a great boxer at range? Would you say Anthony Joshua is super slick?

I hear you fella. I don't actually think we're miles apart, it's just different definitions of what constitutes a boxer - I still regard someone like GGG as having exceptional boxing skills, despite him not being 'slick'.

Rexob wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Complete rubbish.

Why?

Rexob wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Complete rubbish.

Yep, you're right. I have no idea why I thought that. Thanks for correcting me as it was clearly stupid of me to think that a former world titlist who's mixed in better company and who has serious power could trouble Saunders

Saunders probably does get hit a little less than Golovkin but he also lands a lot fewer of his own so you can't really say Saunders is better in that aspect of the game. Saunders couldn't outbox Andy Lee and would have lost the fight without the kd's.

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote: You're missing my point fella. I'm saying that the Abdullevs of this world are the exception to the rule and as a general formline it's indicative of boxing prowess - for every Abdullev there are far, far more Lomechenkos and Rigondeuxs.
As for the O'Sullivan example, if GGG elected to box rather than trade, do you honestly think the result would be any different to the Saunders result? GGG trades as a conscious choice, not because his defence isn't good enough, as evidenced by the tactical adjustments he made for Lemieux.

Fair enough mate but you're missing my point. There's lots of amateurs who have super successful amateur careers ie Olympic golds, World championship golds, etc, etc, who aren't super slick boxers. They're just very good come forward fighters or they have a high punch output and in some cases even the nation they come from plays favourably into it.

I mean Alexander povetkin another example- extremely good amateur career- two European amateur championships golds, World championships gold, Olympic gold and so on. Would you say he's a great boxer at range? Would you say Anthony Joshua is super slick?

I hear you fella. I don't actually think we're miles apart, it's just different definitions of what constitutes a boxer - I still regard someone like GGG as having exceptional boxing skills, despite him not being 'slick'.

GGG is a masterful boxer, his footwork, timing, judgement of distance, and punch placement are superlative. He's far more a boxer than a slugger. It just so happens he's also very heavy handed, every single shot he throws hurts. He can go through the gears and chew people up very quickly because he misses so few and lands with authority whilst controlling the ring.

Eubank Jr has very little chance, he has nothing like the skills to beat GGG, he has a great chin, and is aggressive and powerful, but he's going to be eating heavy shots from the 1st bell with his style. I can't see it ending any other way.

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Lemieux couldn't even stop a shot Alcine or the chinny but Gutsy N'Jikam. He didn't stop upshaw either who himself was stopped by Dominic Wade and even Denis Douglin.

So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

Deadendgeneration wrote:Saunders probably does get hit a little less than Golovkin but he also lands a lot fewer of his own so you can't really say Saunders is better in that aspect of the game. Saunders couldn't outbox Andy Lee and would have lost the fight without the kd's.

BJS would of fought a different fight without the knockdowns ,he knew he had the knockdowns in the bag so decided to box safe an win a world title with a points lead , i thought BJS outboxed Lee perfectly with a two knock lead in his bank ,so did the 99% of ringside where i was sat ....the Irish fans had very little to cheer for at the end or throughout that fight .

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Rexob wrote:

Deserter wrote: I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Complete rubbish.

Why?

Come on! Lemieux isn't that good technically, he does have a bit of power but BJS has everything he would need to beat Lemieux, speed, technique, good chin, boxing skills, experience and listens to tactics. BJS is very underrated on this forum. BJS would probably win by a wide points decision. He always does just enough, showing to me, that there is plenty more to show if he needs it.

crusader wrote:

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote: I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

Lemieux couldn't even stop a shot Alcine or the chinny but Gutsy N'Jikam. He didn't stop upshaw either who himself was stopped by Dominic Wade and even Denis Douglin.

So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:

lefty wrote: Lemieux couldn't even stop a shot Alcine or the chinny but Gutsy N'Jikam. He didn't stop upshaw either who himself was stopped by Dominic Wade and even Denis Douglin.

So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

Would be an interesting fight, I think Lemiuex is a little better than the GGG fight suggests, he's not just a crude slugger.

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:

lefty wrote: Lemieux couldn't even stop a shot Alcine or the chinny but Gutsy N'Jikam. He didn't stop upshaw either who himself was stopped by Dominic Wade and even Denis Douglin.

So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

Fair enough, but do you think it's unreasonable to pick Lemieux via stoppage?

crusader wrote:

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:
So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

Fair enough, but do you think it's unreasonable to pick Lemieux via stoppage?

Not unreasonable but with Saunders being pretty elusive, a southpaw and seeming to have pretty decent punch resistance I think it's unlikely. I think if you have a decent chin and more importantly decent boxing ability- it's not that difficult to outbox Lemieux.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:
So do you think it's unreasonable to predict a Lemieux stoppage over BJS? Are people like Doughlin and Wade more dangerous than DL? Does BJS have N'dam's excellent powers of recovery?

I'm pretty sure that you picked Eubank to stop Saunders, even though Junior had been the distance several times and only stopped trashmen (taking several rounds to halt a guy who Lemieux iced in 2 minutes).

I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

Would be an interesting fight, I think Lemiuex is a little better than the GGG fight suggests, he's not just a crude slugger.

I've not seen much to suggest he is anything more than a crude slugger myself up to now but I respect your opinion mate.

Rexob wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Rexob wrote:

Complete rubbish.

Why?

Come on! Lemieux isn't that good technically, he does have a bit of power but BJS has everything he would need to beat Lemieux, speed, technique, good chin, boxing skills, experience and listens to tactics. BJS is very underrated on this forum. BJS would probably win by a wide points decision. He always does just enough, showing to me, that there is plenty more to show if he needs it.

Lemieux has improved a lot technically and the myth of the boxer who 'just does enough' is a perpetual one. I've been guilty of it in the past, thinking the likes of Howard Eastman are cruising and have more to show if needed, but then the reality hits home that those types of fighters actually don't have the extra gears in their locker, despite appearances. Jeez, I've lost count of the amount of times that posters on here have suggested that certain fighters are better than they seem only to be proven wrong - look at Martin Murray as a perfect example of that.
I'd directly contrast with Lemieux with BJS, as the former relied solely on his power early on and got found out as a result. His response to that is what matters, as he went back to the drawing board and addressed his flaws and dramatically improved as a result. Watching his fight with Tapia he looked a far more complete package - speed (this is really overlooked), power and far tighter in terms of technique and defense.
By contrast, BJS seems happy to coast on natural ability and doesn't live a disciplined life outside the ring. He's still a world-class boxer, but I think time will prove me right in terms of him not having plenty more to show than he has already, as he doesn't appear willing to make the sacrifices that would take him to the next level.

lefty wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

lefty wrote: I did pick Eubank to beat Saunders at the time. However Saunders has shown a good chin up until. Id predict him to beat Lemieux on points.

Would be an interesting fight, I think Lemiuex is a little better than the GGG fight suggests, he's not just a crude slugger.

I've not seen much to suggest he is anything more than a crude slugger myself up to now but I respect your opinion mate.

Watch the Tapia fight fella - trust me, he showed a lot more in his locker.

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Would be an interesting fight, I think Lemiuex is a little better than the GGG fight suggests, he's not just a crude slugger.

I've not seen much to suggest he is anything more than a crude slugger myself up to now but I respect your opinion mate.

Watch the Tapia fight fella - trust me, he showed a lot more in his locker.

I still think he throws himself off a balance when throwing his power punches. He does it a lot with the left hook and just ends up hitting air. I noticed that a lot in the N'Jikam fight and also the GGG fight. He throws everything into every shot which is a sure fight way to gas out aswell as slightly shoddy technique.

lefty wrote:

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote: I've not seen much to suggest he is anything more than a crude slugger myself up to now but I respect your opinion mate.

Watch the Tapia fight fella - trust me, he showed a lot more in his locker.

I still think he throws himself off a balance when throwing his power punches. He does it a lot with the left hook and just ends up hitting air. I noticed that a lot in the N'Jikam fight and also the GGG fight. He throws everything into every shot which is a sure fight way to gas out aswell as slightly shoddy technique.

I was at the Tapia fight and thought he was far tighter and more controlled - something the stats bear out as well.

Deserter wrote:

Omerta wrote:Saunders is obviously the best opponent eubank has faced, who would be GGG's? Geale?
Saunders is arguably better than anyone on GGG's resume

I'd take Lemieux to stop Saunders.

I meant technical ability mate

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Deserter wrote:

lefty wrote: Fair enough mate but you're missing my point. There's lots of amateurs who have super successful amateur careers ie Olympic golds, World championship golds, etc, etc, who aren't super slick boxers. They're just very good come forward fighters or they have a high punch output and in some cases even the nation they come from plays favourably into it.

I mean Alexander povetkin another example- extremely good amateur career- two European amateur championships golds, World championships gold, Olympic gold and so on. Would you say he's a great boxer at range? Would you say Anthony Joshua is super slick?

I hear you fella. I don't actually think we're miles apart, it's just different definitions of what constitutes a boxer - I still regard someone like GGG as having exceptional boxing skills, despite him not being 'slick'.

GGG is a masterful boxer, his footwork, timing, judgement of distance, and punch placement are superlative. He's far more a boxer than a slugger. It just so happens he's also very heavy handed, every single shot he throws hurts. He can go through the gears and chew people up very quickly because he misses so few and lands with authority whilst controlling the ring.

Eubank Jr has very little chance, he has nothing like the skills to beat GGG, he has a great chin, and is aggressive and powerful, but he's going to be eating heavy shots from the 1st bell with his style. I can't see it ending any other way.

I agree with your assessment, he has little to troubke Golovkin with and i think he would take a sustained beating before being stopped. He needs more experience agaunst world class opposition, even then he wont beat Golovkin, but may fair a little better.

I keep saying it, but i find it odd the way Sr is pushing Jr in against Golovkin. He woukd have avoided Golovkin had he been around in his day, but he's all mouth now its not him who has to do the actual fighting, its his son who he's going to get plastered just so Sr can get himself an extra 5 minutes in the press.